Our hope with this campaign is to stimulate the discussion on exactly what 'piracy' means to different people. To an older industry sector, it's a dirty word that implies theft. From a younger, purely consumer standpoint it's another term for distribution. As it stands now, we're more closely aligned with the music consumer - in the sense that we are for this new distribution model, as evident by our efforts thus far to make Ghost Beach original music available for free to fans.

We think that working towards a digital retail/stream model, something similar to Spotify or Rdio, is the future of music - using the Internet as a force for connectivity and development rather then seeing it as the enemy. We subscribe to media futurist Gerd Leonhards 'music like water' philosophy that, one day, individuals will just pay a music bill - similar to their water bill, cable bill, electric bill - for unabated access. In this (hopefully attainable) Utopian music society, music will be available to consumers at a fare rate and artists/labels will be compensated with a fair royalty rate. In no way do we want to encourage theft of intellectual property. However we definitely support the idea of music distribution adapting to new technologies rather then fight against them.

i don't think those two options actually represent piracy/nonpiracy, since they're both legitimate, legal options offered by the band, but i see what they're trying to get at. i think they're just missing the point of piracy being without the consent of the artist.